UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF … · Eugenio Vides Casanova, Director-General...
Transcript of UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF … · Eugenio Vides Casanova, Director-General...
SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR TORTURE; CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY; CRUEL, INHUMAN OR
DEGRADING TREATMENT OR PUNISHMENT; AND ARBITRARY DETENTION
wc-36270
1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA JUAN ROMAGOZA ARCE, NERIS GONZALEZ, CARLOS MAURICIO, and JORGE MONTES, Plaintiffs, v. JOSE GUILLERMO GARCIA, an individual, CARLOS EUGENIO VIDES CASANOVA, an individual, and DOES 1 through 50, inclusive, Defendants.
Case No. 99-8364 CIV-HURLEY
SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR TORTURE; CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY; CRUEL, INHUMAN OR DEGRADING TREATMENT OR PUNISHMENT; AND ARBITRARY DETENTION JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
Plaintiffs Juan Romagoza Arce, Neris Gonzalez, Carlos Mauricio, and Jorge Montes
(collectively “Plaintiffs”), complain and allege as follows:
PRELIMINARY STATEMENT
1. This is a civil action for compensatory and punitive damages for torts in violation
of international and domestic law. Plaintiffs in this action—refugees from El Salvador now
living in the United States—institute this action against Defendants General Jose Guillermo
Garcia, Defense Minister of El Salvador from October 1979 to April 1983, and General Carlos
Eugenio Vides Casanova, Director-General of the Salvadoran National Guard from October 1979
to April 1983 and subsequently Defense Minister of El Salvador upon Defendant Garcia’s
retirement in 1983.
2. On December 12, 1980, Plaintiff Juan Romagoza Arce, a Salvadoran doctor, was
abducted, detained, and tortured in El Salvador by members of the Salvadoran National Guard
for three and a half weeks. On December 26, 1979, Plaintiff Neris Gonzalez, a former lay
worker and catechist with the Catholic Church, was abducted, detained, tortured and raped in
El Salvador by members of the Salvadoran National Guard for a period of approximately two
weeks. Plaintiff Gonzalez was eight months pregnant during her detention. On or about June 13,
SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR TORTURE; CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY; CRUEL, INHUMAN OR
DEGRADING TREATMENT OR PUNISHMENT; AND ARBITRARY DETENTION
wc-36270
2
1983, Plaintiff Carlos Mauricio, a former professor at the University of El Salvador, was
abducted from the University, taken into detention at the National Police Headquarters,
interrogated and tortured for one and one-half weeks. In June 1981, Plaintiff Jorge Montes, a
former church lay worker and youth group organizer, was detained and tortured by members of
the Salvadoran military for approximately one week. Each Plaintiff suffered severe physical and
psychological injuries as a result of their detention and torture.
3. Defendants Garcia and Vides Casanova acted in concert with and exercised
command responsibility over other members of the Salvadoran Military and Security Forces to
plan, carry out and cover up the abduction and torture of the Plaintiffs. Further, Defendants
failed to prevent or punish the violations of international law committed by their subordinates.
Under international and domestic law, Defendants are liable to Plaintiffs for the injuries Plaintiffs
suffered.
JURISDICTION AND VENUE
4. This court has jurisdiction over the international law claims brought by Plaintiffs
Gonzalez, Mauricio, and Montes by virtue of 28 U.S.C. § 1350 (the Alien Tort Claims Act),
which provides federal jurisdiction and a cause of action for “any civil action by an alien for a
tort only, committed in violation of the law of nations or a treaty of the United States.” The court
has jurisdiction over all Plaintiffs’ torture claims by virtue of 28 U.S.C. § 1350 note (the Torture
Victim Protection Act), which provides federal jurisdiction and a cause of action for victims of
torture (United States citizens and aliens alike).
5. Venue is proper in the United States Federal Court for the Southern District of
Florida pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1391(b) and (d), because both Defendants reside within the
jurisdiction of this court.
PARTIES
Plaintiffs
6. Plaintiff Juan Romagoza Arce, a native of El Salvador, is a naturalized citizen of
the United States.
SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR TORTURE; CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY; CRUEL, INHUMAN OR
DEGRADING TREATMENT OR PUNISHMENT; AND ARBITRARY DETENTION
wc-36270
3
7. Plaintiff Neris Gonzalez, a native and citizen of El Salvador, is currently residing
as a political asylee in the United States.
8. Plaintiff Carlos Mauricio, a native and citizen of El Salvador, currently resides in
the United States as a legal permanent resident. Plaintiff Mauricio’s claims are limited to
Defendant Vides Casanova.
9. Plaintiff Jorge Montes, a native and citizen of El Salvador, currently resides with
political asylum in the United States. Plaintiff Montes’ claims are limited to Defendant Garcia.
Defendants
10. On information and belief, Defendant General Jose Guillermo Garcia (“Defendant
Garcia”) is a native and citizen of El Salvador and a resident of Florida. From about
October 1979 to approximately April 1983, Defendant Garcia was the Minister of Defense and
Public Security of the Republic of El Salvador. As Minister of Defense, Defendant Garcia was a
member of the Salvadoran Military High Command and exercised overall command
responsibility for the operations of the Salvadoran Armed Forces consisting of the “Military
Forces” (Infantry, Navy, Air Force and Cavalry) and the “Security Forces” (National Guard,
National Police and Treasury Police). In or about April 1983, Defendant Garcia retired from the
Salvadoran military and stepped down from his position as Minister of Defense. He
subsequently relocated to the United States.
11. On information and belief, General Carlos Eugenio Vides Casanova (“Defendant
Vides Casanova”) is a native and citizen of El Salvador and a resident of Florida. From
approximately October 1979 through April 1983, Defendant Vides Casanova was the Director-
General of the National Guard for the Republic of El Salvador. As Director-General of the
National Guard, Defendant Vides Casanova was a member of the Salvadoran Military High
Command and exercised direct command responsibility over the operations of the Salvadoran
National Guard. Upon the retirement of Defendant Garcia, Defendant Vides Casanova was
promoted to the position of El Salvador’s Minister of Defense. Defendant Vides Casanova
entered the United States on or about August 21, 1989.
SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR TORTURE; CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY; CRUEL, INHUMAN OR
DEGRADING TREATMENT OR PUNISHMENT; AND ARBITRARY DETENTION
wc-36270
4
STATEMENT OF FACTS
Plaintiff Juan Romagoza Arce
12. Plaintiff Juan Romagoza Arce is a Salvadoran doctor who attended the School of
Medicine of the University of El Salvador from 1970-1980. As part of his medical training
Plaintiff Romagoza Arce worked with others at the University of El Salvador and in the Catholic
Church to establish medical clinics for the poor in rural areas as well as in the capital, San
Salvador.
13. On or about December 12, 1980, Plaintiff Romagoza Arce was providing medical
care at a church clinic in Santa Anita, Chalatenango. While Plaintiff Romagoza Arce was
treating patients, two vehicles arrived carrying soldiers from the local army garrison, the National
Guard, and ORDEN (a government-sponsored paramilitary group). Perched on top of the trucks,
the soldiers and Guardsmen opened fire upon the people administering and receiving medical
care at the church clinic.
14. The soldiers and Guardsmen shot Plaintiff Romagoza Arce in the right foot and
another bullet grazed his head. The soldiers and Guardsmen detained Plaintiff Romagoza Arce
as a “subversive leader” because he possessed medical and surgical instruments. Plaintiff
Romagoza Arce received no medical treatment for these injuries.
15. Subsequently, Plaintiff Romagoza Arce was blindfolded and taken by helicopter
to a local army garrison. During the flight, soldiers pushed Plaintiff Romagoza Arce to the edge
of the open door of the helicopter and threatened to throw him out. Upon his arrival at the
garrison, Plaintiff Romagoza Arce was stripped of his clothes, bound spread eagle to a table,
interrogated and beaten.
16. The next morning (on or about December 13, 1980), Plaintiff Romagoza Arce was
transferred to the National Guard headquarters in San Salvador. Once inside, Guardsmen
showed him other prisoners who had been tortured, and asked if he wanted to have the same
thing happen to him. He was put on a table, beaten and interrogated, and threatened with
additional torture for failing to answer questions to their satisfaction. He was stuck with needles,
producing intense pain, and threatened with death.
SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR TORTURE; CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY; CRUEL, INHUMAN OR
DEGRADING TREATMENT OR PUNISHMENT; AND ARBITRARY DETENTION
wc-36270
5
17. At the end of his second day of detention, Plaintiff Romagoza Arce was chained
to an iron rod, naked and wounded, and interrogated again. The Guardsmen administered
electric shocks to his ears, tongue, testicles, anus, and the edges of his wounds until he lost
consciousness. The Guardsmen would force Plaintiff to regain consciousness by kicking him or
burning him with cigarettes.
18. For approximately the next 22 days, Plaintiff Romagoza Arce was interrogated
and tortured every day—sometimes three or four times per day.
19. For several days, the Guardsmen hung Plaintiff Romagoza Arce with ropes made
of sharp material that cut into his fingers. Plaintiff Romagoza Arce was told that he would never
be a surgeon again. The Guardsmen also shot him in the left hand, severing the muscles and
tendons, in a gesture said to be aimed at his “leftist” politics. Additionally, the Guardsmen anally
raped Plaintiff Romagoza Arce with foreign objects and subjected him to additional electric
shocks, water torture, and asphyxiation with a hood containing cal (calcium oxide, or lime).
20. During Plaintiff Romagoza Arce’s detention, Defendant Vides Casanova was
physically present on two occasions. The first occasion was in late December 1980 or early
January 1981, approximately four or five days prior to Plaintiff Romagoza Arce’s release. At
this time, Vides Casanova and other military officers—including Plaintiff Romagoza Arce’s
uncle, Lt. Col. Salvador Mejia Arce—visited Plaintiff Romagoza Arce in his cell. On prior
occasions, Plaintiff Romagoza Arce had informed the Guardsmen about his two uncles in the
Salvadoran military, Salvador Mejia Arce and Manuel Rafael Arce Blandon, hoping that this
would save his life.
21. After this incident, Plaintiff Romagoza Arce’s captors moved him into another
room and kept him in a coffin-like box for four or five days. Periodically they would return to
threaten, kick or burn him with lighted cigarettes.
22. Defendant Vides Casanova was also physically present during Plaintiff Romagoza
Arce’s release on or about January 5, 1981. Plaintiff Romagoza Arce was released to his uncle,
Lt. Colonel Manuel Rafael Arce Blandon, who was a government economist. His other uncle,
Lt. Col. Salvador Mejia Arce, stood nearby conversing with Defendant Vides Casanova.
SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR TORTURE; CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY; CRUEL, INHUMAN OR
DEGRADING TREATMENT OR PUNISHMENT; AND ARBITRARY DETENTION
wc-36270
6
23. After his release, Plaintiff Romagoza Arce fled El Salvador. He arrived in the
United States in April 1983. As a direct result of the injuries inflicted during his detention,
Plaintiff Romagoza Arce lost his ability to perform surgery and continues to suffer the physical
and psychological effects of his torture.
24. Based upon the persecution described above, Plaintiff Romagoza Arce was
granted political asylum in the United States on April 21, 1987. He subsequently applied to
become a legal permanent resident and became a naturalized citizen in 1995.
Plaintiff Neris Gonzalez
25. Plaintiff Gonzalez is a Salvadoran woman who worked for several years as a
catechist and lay worker with Catholic parishes throughout El Salvador.
26. On December 26, 1979, Plaintiff Gonzalez—who was then eight months
pregnant—was abducted without cause from the central market in San Vicente by four National
Guardsmen dressed in uniform and armed with assault rifles. The National Guardsmen forcibly
led Plaintiff Gonzalez to the National Guard Post in San Vicente where she was detained in a
small interrogation room. The Guardsmen asked Plaintiff Gonzalez if she had any ties to, or if
she had collaborated with, the guerrillas. When she answered “no”, they pistol-whipped and beat
her.
27. Over the course of her detention, Plaintiff Gonzalez was repeatedly tortured. The
Guardsmen pushed pins under her nails, telling her that cooperating with them would cost her
nothing. They repeatedly burned her with cigarettes and poured liquid on the burns to intensify
the pain. The Guardsmen also repeatedly cut the surface of her fingertips, thighs and breasts with
a razor blade and hit her in the chest. On one occasion, the Guardsmen pulled out her fingernails
with a pair of pliers. On three occasions, they administered electric shocks while asphyxiating
Plaintiff Gonzalez with a powder-filled rubber mask.
28. After about three days, Plaintiff Gonzalez was taken out of the interrogation room
and pushed down a flight of stairs by the Guardsmen. She was subsequently detained,
handcuffed and bound with chains, in the basement of the National Guard Post for approximately
twelve days.
SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR TORTURE; CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY; CRUEL, INHUMAN OR
DEGRADING TREATMENT OR PUNISHMENT; AND ARBITRARY DETENTION
wc-36270
7
29. During the course of the twelve days, the National Guardsmen repeatedly raped,
tortured and withheld food from Plaintiff Gonzalez. At night, the Guardsmen would force her to
sit, neck-deep, in a basin of ice water for one to two hours. When she was taken out of the water,
her body was completely numb.
30. On at least two occasions, Plaintiff Gonzalez’s torture involved injuries to her
uterus. She was put under a metal bed frame while Guardsmen stomped on top of the frame.
The Guardsmen also balanced the bed frame over her abdomen, standing on both ends of the bed
frame like a seesaw.
31. Plaintiff Gonzalez was also forced to witness acts of torture against others. She
was forced to watch the Guardsmen beat a man. After the beating, he was whipped with plastic
whips and kicked in the testicles. Subsequently, the Guardsmen handcuffed the man’s hands
behind his back and suspended him from the ceiling by his arms and legs. One of the Guardsmen
then sat on top of the man and began to ride him like a swing. The Guardsmen took the man
down from his suspended position, cut open his stomach, pushed Plaintiff Gonzalez’s face into
the wound and forced her to drink his blood.
32. In a separate incident, Plaintiff Gonzalez was forced to watch the torture of a boy
who looked to be approximately 14 years old. In front of Plaintiff Gonzalez, a Guardsman
gouged out the boy’s eye with a tool. Tissue from the eye socket landed on Plaintiff Gonzalez’s
chest and she fainted from the sight. When she regained consciousness, the Guardsmen hit her in
the back of the head with the blunt end of their machetes and cut into her forearms with the point
of their machetes.
33. Plaintiff Gonzalez was later dumped, unconscious, in an area outside of San
Vicente. A local villager took Plaintiff Gonzalez into her home and Plaintiff Gonzalez began her
recovery. Approximately eight days later, Plaintiff Gonzalez was taken to a church in San
Salvador, where she received medical treatment at a clinic and recuperated at the neighboring
convent.
SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR TORTURE; CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY; CRUEL, INHUMAN OR
DEGRADING TREATMENT OR PUNISHMENT; AND ARBITRARY DETENTION
wc-36270
8
34. Due to the torture inflicted by the Guardsmen, Plaintiff Gonzalez’s infant son was
born with multiple injuries, broken bones and indentations on his face. He died two months after
his birth as a result of these injuries.
35. Plaintiff Gonzalez fled El Salvador for the United States and was eventually
granted political asylum. She is currently petitioning for legal permanent residency.
36. As a direct result of her torture, Plaintiff Gonzalez sustained severe physical and
psychological injuries. Since the time of these injuries, she has received treatment for post-
traumatic stress syndrome.
Plaintiff Carlos Mauricio
37. On or about June 13, 1983, Plaintiff Mauricio, a professor at the University of
El Salvador, was abducted without cause from his classroom by individuals dressed in civilian
clothes who forced him into an unmarked vehicle. After his abduction, the University and others
launched a campaign to determine his whereabouts and to obtain his immediate release. The
Salvadoran Defense Ministry issued a written statement acknowledging the detention of Plaintiff
Mauricio at the National Police headquarters.
38. Plaintiff Mauricio was detained at the National Police headquarters in San
Salvador for approximately one and one-half weeks. During his first week in detention, he was
tortured and interrogated in a clandestine torture center at the National Police headquarters as a
suspected Farabundo Marti National Liberation Front (FMLN) “comandante” (commander).
39. Plaintiff Mauricio’s captors at the National Police headquarters strung him up
with his hands behind his back over his head, and repeatedly hit him with a metal bar covered
with rubber, inflicting injuries to his face and torso. During the first 2-3 days of detention,
Plaintiff Mauricio was given no food to eat. He was denied use of a bathroom throughout his
confinement in the torture center. He was also forced, along with other detainees, to stand for
hours at a time and failure to do so resulted in being singled out for additional physical abuse.
40. On or about June 23, 1983 Plaintiff Mauricio was released. He subsequently fled
El Salvador for the United States, where he now resides.
SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR TORTURE; CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY; CRUEL, INHUMAN OR
DEGRADING TREATMENT OR PUNISHMENT; AND ARBITRARY DETENTION
wc-36270
9
41. Plaintiff Mauricio suffered injuries to his ribs, eyes and mouth inflicted during
this detention. In addition to his physical injuries, Plaintiff Mauricio continues to suffer from the
long-term psychological effects of his torture.
Plaintiff Jorge Montes
42. In early 1981, Plaintiff Montes began working as a volunteer at a church located
in downtown San Salvador, which served as a focal point for protest against the government.
The church was monitored by the Salvadoran Military and Security Forces.
43. In June of 1981, when he was nineteen years old, Plaintiff Montes and three
members of the church’s youth group were en route to San Salvador when they were stopped by
infantry soldiers and taken to an unoccupied distillery. The soldiers accused Plaintiff Montes and
his companions of being guerrillas. The soldiers searched them and then began to kick and beat
them with the butts of their rifles. The beating continued for approximately an hour, during
which time Plaintiff Montes was seriously injured.
44. After the beating, Plaintiff Montes and his friends were blindfolded and
handcuffed. They were then forced to lay face down in the back of the truck while the soldiers
stood on top of their backs and held the barrels of rifles at the backs of their heads. They were
driven around over rough roads for approximately three hours in extreme heat, their bodies
violently bouncing against the floor of the truck.
45. When the truck stopped, Plaintiff Montes and his friends were led into the infantry
barracks at San Juan Opico, in the Department of La Libertad, subjected to additional beatings
and drugged. The drug caused Plaintiff Montes to feel very dizzy. Soldiers at the barracks
interrogated Plaintiff Montes and urged him to admit he was a guerrilla. Soldiers beat Plaintiff
Montes in the ribs with a rifle butt. After the interrogation, Plaintiff Montes was detained with
approximately twenty other people. His was given food once a day, which he believed was also
drugged.
46. During his detention, Plaintiff Montes was subjected to several different
interrogation sessions, from one to two hours each. During each session he was beaten and
accused of being a guerrilla.
SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR TORTURE; CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY; CRUEL, INHUMAN OR
DEGRADING TREATMENT OR PUNISHMENT; AND ARBITRARY DETENTION
wc-36270
10
47. After approximately one week, Plaintiff Montes and his associates were released.
Based upon the persecution described herein, he subsequently fled El Salvador for the United
States and was granted political asylum. He continues to live with the psychological injuries
from his detention and torture.
GENERAL ALLEGATIONS
48. Between December 1979 to 1992, the people of El Salvador were engulfed in a
civil war in which over 75,000 people are estimated to have been killed. Throughout this period,
the Salvadoran Armed Forces (including the Military and Security Forces) employed numerous
counter-insurgency methods—including arbitrary detention, forced disappearance, torture and
murder—to control the Salvadoran population and intimidate and eliminate perceived and/or
actual opponents of the Salvadoran government. The hostilities and oppression did not come to a
formal conclusion until a Peace Agreement was negotiated under the auspices of the United
Nations and signed on January 16, 1992.
49. The acts described herein were inflicted under actual or apparent authority or
color of law of members of the Government and Armed Forces of El Salvador, including the
Defendants. The acts of abduction, detention and torture inflicted upon Plaintiffs Juan
Romagoza Arce, Neris Gonzales, Carlos Mauricio, and Jorge Montes were part of a pattern and
practice of systematic human rights violations committed in El Salvador from 1979 to 1983, for
which Defendants Garcia and Vides Casanova—acting as Ministers of Defense and, in the case
of Defendant Vides Casanova, Director-General of the National Guard—bear personal
responsibility.
50. At all relevant times, the Minister of Defense stood at the pinnacle of the
Salvadoran Military High Command. The military was divided into distinct forces: the Military
Forces (Infantry, Navy, Air Force and Cavalry) and the Security Forces (the National Guard, the
National Police and the Treasury Police). Each force was represented on the Salvadoran Military
High Command by its respective Director-General. The ultimate decision-making power and
final responsibility for any military operation rested with the Salvadoran Military High
Command.
SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR TORTURE; CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY; CRUEL, INHUMAN OR
DEGRADING TREATMENT OR PUNISHMENT; AND ARBITRARY DETENTION
wc-36270
11
51. As members of the Salvadoran Military High Command, Defendants Garcia and
Vides Casanova had a duty—under customary international law, multilateral treaties and
Salvadoran law—to ensure the protection of noncombatants present in El Salvador during
military operations; to prevent violations of international law by the Military and Security Forces;
and to ensure that all persons under their command were trained in, and complied with, the laws
of land warfare and international law, including the international law prohibitions against torture,
crimes against humanity, arbitrary detention, and cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment or
punishment. Further, the Defendants were under a duty to investigate, prevent and punish
violations of international law committed by members of the Military and Security Forces under
their command.
52. At all relevant times, Defendants Garcia and Vides Casanova knew or reasonably
should have known of the pattern and practice of gross human rights abuses perpetrated by
subordinates under their respective commands, including the abuses directed against the
Plaintiffs. Defendants Garcia and Vides Casanova failed or refused to take action to prevent or
punish such violations of international law, thus materially contributing to the uncontrolled
violence committed by members of the Salvadoran Military and Security Forces against
noncombatants.
53. Defendants Garcia and Vides Casanova are liable for the acts of arbitrary
detention; torture; cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment; and crimes against humanity alleged
herein because the individuals who committed the atrocities were the subordinates,
representatives, co-conspirators and/or agents of Defendants Garcia and Vides Casanova. The
Salvadoran Security and Military Forces acted under Defendants Garcia and Vides Casanova’s
direct or implicit instructions, authority and control and within the scope of authority granted to
them and overseen by the High Command and the Government of El Salvador. Defendants
Vides Casanova and Garciainstead of acting to punish or prevent such abusesordered,
instigated, permitted, encouraged, authorized, covered up, and ratified the commission of gross
human rights violations by the Military and Security Forces under their respective commands.
SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR TORTURE; CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY; CRUEL, INHUMAN OR
DEGRADING TREATMENT OR PUNISHMENT; AND ARBITRARY DETENTION
wc-36270
12
54. Defendants Garcia and Vides Casanova are further liable to Plaintiffs for their
injuries, because the acts described herein were committed in furtherance of an agreement among
members of the Salvadoran Military and Security Forces including the Defendants to eliminate
and/or intimidate perceived and/or actual opponents of the government of the Republic of El
Salvador. The Defendants and their co-conspirators conspired to violate international and
domestic law and carried out a series of overt acts in furtherance of this conspiracy, including,
inter alia, detaining and torturing Plaintiffs and forcing them to witness the torture of others.
Defendants and their co-conspirators further conspired to conceal and cover up these violations
of international and domestic law in furtherance of this conspiracy.
Absence of Remedies In El Salvador
55. In March 1993, the Salvadoran legislature adopted a broad and unconditional
amnesty for any individual implicated in “political offenses” (Decreto No. 486). The amnesty
law foreclosed both civil and criminal liability for all individuals who had participated in any
way in the commission of political crimes, common crimes related to political crimes, or
common crimes committed before January 1, 1992. This law, as currently interpreted, precludes
liability under Salvadoran law for those responsible for Plaintiffs’ detention and torture.
Consequently, there are no adequate available remedies for Plaintiffs to exhaust in El Salvador.
To date, the government of El Salvador has not proceeded, nor has it shown any intention of
proceeding, against Defendants for their involvement in human rights violations committed when
they served as Ministers of Defense or, in the case of Defendant Vides Casanova, Director of the
National Guard.
FIRST CLAIM FOR RELIEF
(Torture under the Torture Victim Protection Act)
56. Plaintiffs reallege and incorporate by reference the specific allegations set forth in
paragraphs 14 through 21 (Plaintiff Romagoza Arce), paragraphs 27 through 33 (Plaintiff
Gonzalez), paragraphs 38 through 39 (Plaintiff Mauricio), and paragraphs 43 through 46
(Plaintiff Montes), and the general allegations related to their claims as if fully set forth herein.
Plaintiffs Romagoza Arce, Gonzalez, and Mauricio state this claim for relief against Defendant
SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR TORTURE; CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY; CRUEL, INHUMAN OR
DEGRADING TREATMENT OR PUNISHMENT; AND ARBITRARY DETENTION
wc-36270
13
Vides Casanova; Plaintiffs Romagoza Arce, Gonzalez, and Montes state this claim for relief
against Defendant Garcia.
57. The acts described herein constituted torture as defined in the Torture Victim
Protection Act, Pub. L. No. 102-256, 106 Stat. 73 (1992) (codified at 28 U.S.C. § 1350 note),
which provides federal jurisdiction and a cause of action for acts of torture, regardless of where
they were committed or the citizenship of the victims or perpetrators.
58. The harms to Plaintiffs described herein were inflicted by and/or at the instigation
of a public official or other person acting in an official capacity.
59. Plaintiffs were subjected to torture while in the custody and/or physical control of
the Defendants, their subordinates, their agents and/or their co-conspirators in the Salvadoran
Military and Security Forces.
60. Defendants’ subordinates, agents and/or co-conspirators in the Salvadoran
Military and Security Forces specifically intended to inflict severe mental and physical pain and
suffering on Plaintiffs. The harms to Plaintiffs were inflicted deliberately and intentionally by
Defendants’ subordinates, agents and/or co-conspirators for one or more of the following
purposes: to punish Plaintiffs for an act they or another person committed or were suspected of
having committed; to intimidate or coerce Plaintiffs or another person; and/or to discriminate
against Plaintiffs.
61. Defendants Vides Casanova and Garcia ordered, instigated, permitted,
encouraged, authorized, covered up, and/or ratified the acts of torture committed by the Military
and Security Forces under their respective commands. Defendants acted to conceal and cover-up
the conduct alleged herein so that Defendants and their subordinates, agents and/or co-
conspirators could commit such acts with impunity. Further, Defendants failed to prevent abuses
or punish the perpetrators.
62. The pain or suffering described herein did not arise from and was not incidental to
lawful sanctions.
63. The acts described herein placed Plaintiffs in imminent fear for their lives and
caused them to suffer severe physical and mental pain and suffering. As a result of the torture
SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR TORTURE; CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY; CRUEL, INHUMAN OR
DEGRADING TREATMENT OR PUNISHMENT; AND ARBITRARY DETENTION
wc-36270
14
described above, each named Plaintiff is entitled to compensation in an amount to be determined
at trial.
64. Defendants’ acts were deliberate, willful, intentional, wanton, malicious, and
oppressive and should be punished by an award of punitive damages in an amount to be
determined at trial.
SECOND CLAIM FOR RELIEF
(Torture under the Alien Tort Claims Act and the Convention Against Torture
and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment)
65. Plaintiffs Gonzalez, Mauricio and Montes reallege and incorporate by reference
the specific allegations set forth in paragraphs 27 through 33 (Plaintiff Gonzalez), paragraphs 38
through 39 (Plaintiff Mauricio), and paragraphs 43 through 46 (Plaintiff Montes), and the general
allegations related to their claims as if fully set forth herein. Plaintiffs Gonzalez and Mauricio
state this claim for relief against Defendant Vides Casanova; Plaintiffs Gonzalez and Montes
state this claim for relief against Defendant Garcia.
66. The torture of alien Plaintiffs Gonzalez, Mauricio and Montes described herein
constituted “tort[s] … committed in violation of the law of nations or a treaty of the United
States” under the Alien Tort Claims Act, 28 U.S.C. § 1350, in that they Convention Against
Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, G.A. Res. 39/46, 39
U.N. Doc., GAOR Supp. (No. 51) at 197, U.N. Doc. A/39/51 (1984) (“Torture Convention”).
67. The harms to Plaintiffs Gonzalez, Mauricio, and Montes described herein were
inflicted by and at the instigation of a public official or other person acting in an official capacity.
68. Plaintiffs were subjected to torture while in the custody and/or physical control of
the Defendants, their subordinates, their agents and/or their co-conspirators in the Salvadoran
Military and Security Forces.
69. Defendants’ subordinates, agents and/or co-conspirators in the Salvadoran
Military and Security Forces specifically intended to inflict severe mental and physical pain and
suffering on Plaintiffs. The harms to Plaintiffs were inflicted deliberately and intentionally by
Defendants’ subordinates, agents and/or co-conspirators for one or more of the following
SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR TORTURE; CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY; CRUEL, INHUMAN OR
DEGRADING TREATMENT OR PUNISHMENT; AND ARBITRARY DETENTION
wc-36270
15
purposes: to punish Plaintiffs for an act they or another person committed or were suspected of
having committed; to intimidate or coerce Plaintiffs or another person; and/or to discriminate
against Plaintiffs.
70. Defendants Vides Casanova and Garcia ordered, instigated, permitted,
encouraged, authorized, covered up, and/or ratified the acts of torture committed by the Military
and Security Forces under their respective commands. Defendants acted to conceal and cover-up
the conduct alleged herein so that Defendants and their subordinates, agents and/or co-
conspirators could commit such acts with impunity. Further, Defendants failed to prevent abuses
or punish the perpetrators.
71. The pain or suffering described herein did not arise from and was not incidental to
lawful sanctions.
72. The acts described herein placed Plaintiffs Gonzalez, Mauricio, and Montes in
imminent fear for their lives and caused them to suffer severe physical and mental pain and
suffering. As a result of the torture described above, Plaintiffs Gonzalez, Mauricio, and Montes
are entitled to compensation in an amount to be determined at trial.
73. Defendants’ acts were deliberate, willful, intentional, wanton, malicious, and
oppressive and should be punished by an award of punitive damages in an amount to be
determined at trial.
THIRD CLAIM FOR RELIEF
(Torture under the Alien Tort Claims Act and the International Covenant on Civil and Political
Rights)
74. Plaintiffs Gonzalez, Mauricio and Montes reallege and incorporate by reference
the specific allegations set forth in paragraphs 27 through 33 (Plaintiff Gonzalez), paragraphs 38
through 39 (Plaintiff Mauricio), and paragraphs 43 through 46 (Plaintiff Montes), and the general
allegations related to their claims as if fully set forth herein. Plaintiffs Gonzalez and Mauricio
state this claim for relief against Defendant Vides Casanova; Plaintiffs Gonzalez and Montes
state this claim for relief against Defendant Garcia.
SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR TORTURE; CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY; CRUEL, INHUMAN OR
DEGRADING TREATMENT OR PUNISHMENT; AND ARBITRARY DETENTION
wc-36270
16
75. The torture of Alien Plaintiffs Gonzalez, Mauricio, and Montes described herein
constituted “tort[s] ... committed in violation of the law of nations or a treaty of the United
States” under the Alien Tort Claims Act, 28 U.S.C. §1350, in that they violated the International
Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, G.A. Res. 2220A (xxi), 21 U.N. Doc., GAOR Supp. (No.
16) at 52, U.N. Doc. A/6316 (1966) (“ICCPR”).
76. The harms to Plaintiffs Gonzalez, Mauricio, and Montes described herein were
inflicted by and at the instigation of a public official or other person acting in an official capacity.
77. Plaintiffs were subjected to torture while in the custody and/or physical control of
the Defendants, their subordinates, their agents and/or their co-conspirators in the Salvadoran
Military and Security Forces.
78. Defendants’ subordinates, agents and/or co-conspirators in the Salvadoran
Military and Security Forces specifically intended to inflict severe mental and physical pain and
suffering on Plaintiffs. The harms to Plaintiffs were inflicted deliberately and intentionally by
Defendants’ subordinates, agents and/or co-conspirators for one or more of the following
purposes: to punish Plaintiffs for an act they or another person committed or were suspected of
having committed; to intimidate or coerce Plaintiffs or another person; and/or to discriminate
against Plaintiffs.
79. Defendants Vides Casanova and Garcia ordered, instigated, permitted,
encouraged, authorized, covered up, and/or ratified the acts of torture committed by the Military
and Security Forces under their respective commands. Defendants acted to conceal and cover-up
the conduct alleged herein so that Defendants and their subordinates, agents and/or co-
conspirators could commit such acts with impunity. Further, Defendants failed to prevent abuses
or punish the perpetrators.
80. The pain or suffering described herein did not arise from and was not incidental to
lawful sanctions.
81. The acts described herein placed Plaintiffs Gonzalez, Mauricio, and Montes in
imminent fear for their lives and caused them to suffer severe physical and mental pain and
SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR TORTURE; CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY; CRUEL, INHUMAN OR
DEGRADING TREATMENT OR PUNISHMENT; AND ARBITRARY DETENTION
wc-36270
17
suffering. As a result of the torture described above, Plaintiffs Gonzalez, Mauricio, and Montes
are entitled to compensation in an amount to be determined at trial.
82. Defendants’ acts were deliberate, willful, intentional, wanton, malicious, and
oppressive and should be punished by an award of punitive damages in an amount to be
determined at trial.
FOURTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF
(Torture under the Alien Tort Claims Act and Customary International Law)
83. Plaintiffs Gonzalez, Mauricio and Montes reallege and incorporate by reference
the specific allegations set forth in paragraphs 27 through 33 (Plaintiff Gonzalez), paragraphs 38
through 39 (Plaintiff Mauricio), and paragraphs 43 through 46 (Plaintiff Montes), and the general
allegations related to their claims as if fully set forth herein. Plaintiffs Gonzalez and Mauricio
state this claim for relief against Defendant Vides Casanova; Plaintiffs Gonzalez and Montes
state this claim for relief against Defendant Garcia.
84. The acts of torture of Plaintiffs Gonzalez, Mauricio, and Montes described herein
constituted “tort[s] ... committed in violation of the law of nations or a treaty of the United States
according to the Alien Tort Claims Act, 28 U.S.C. §1350, in that they constituted a violation of
customary international law as part of the “the law of nations.” The customary international law
prohibition against torture is reflected, expressed, defined and codified in the Torture
Convention; the ICCPR; the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, G.A. Res. 217A(iii), U.N.
Doc. A/810 (1948); the Declaration on the Protection of All Persons From Being Subjected to
Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, G.A. Res. 3452, 30
U.N. Doc., GAOR Supp. (No. 34) at 91, U.N. Doc. A/10034 (1976); the American Convention
on Human Rights (Pact of San Jose, Costa Rica), O.A.S.T.S. No. 36 at 1, O.A.S. Off. Rec.
OEA/Ser. L/V/II, 23, doc. 21, rev. 2 (English 1978); the Fourth Geneva Convention; Protocol II;
and the Inter-American Convention to Prevent and Punish Torture, O.A.S.T.S. No. 67, O.A.S.
Doc. OEA/Ser. P, AG/doc. 023/85 rev. 1, at 46-54 (English 1986), reprinted in 25 I.L.M. 519
(1986).
SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR TORTURE; CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY; CRUEL, INHUMAN OR
DEGRADING TREATMENT OR PUNISHMENT; AND ARBITRARY DETENTION
wc-36270
18
85. The harms to Plaintiffs Gonzalez, Mauricio, and Montes described herein were
inflicted by and at the instigation of a public official or other person acting in an official capacity.
86. Plaintiffs were subjected to torture while in the custody and/or physical control of
the Defendants, their subordinates, their agents and/or their co-conspirators in the Salvadoran
Military and Security Forces.
87. Defendants’ subordinates, agents and/or co-conspirators in the Salvadoran
Military and Security Forces specifically intended to inflict severe mental and physical pain and
suffering on Plaintiffs Gonzalez, Mauricio, and Montes. The harms to Plaintiffs Gonzalez,
Mauricio, and Montes were inflicted deliberately and intentionally by Defendants’ subordinates,
agents and/or co-conspirators for one or more of the following purposes: to punish Plaintiffs for
an act they or another person committed or were suspected of having committed; to intimidate or
coerce Plaintiffs or another person; and/or to discriminate against Plaintiffs.
88. Defendants Vides Casanova and Garcia ordered, instigated, permitted,
encouraged, authorized, covered up, and/or ratified the acts of torture committed by the Military
and Security Forces under their respective commands. Defendants acted to conceal and cover-up
the conduct alleged herein so that Defendants and their subordinates, agents and/or co-
conspirators could commit such acts with impunity. Further, Defendants failed to prevent abuses
or punish the perpetrators.
89. The pain or suffering described herein did not arise from and was not incidental to
lawful sanctions.
90. The acts described herein placed Plaintiffs Gonzalez, Mauricio, and Montes in
imminent fear for their lives and caused them to suffer severe physical and mental pain and
suffering. As a result of the torture described above, Plaintiffs Gonzalez, Mauricio, and Montes
are entitled to compensation in an amount to be determined at trial.
91. Defendants’ acts were deliberate, willful, intentional, wanton, malicious, and
oppressive and should be punished by an award of punitive damages in an amount to be
determined at trial.
SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR TORTURE; CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY; CRUEL, INHUMAN OR
DEGRADING TREATMENT OR PUNISHMENT; AND ARBITRARY DETENTION
wc-36270
19
FIFTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF
(Crimes Against Humanity Under the Alien Tort Claims Act and Customary International Law)
92. Plaintiffs Gonzalez, Mauricio, and Montes reallege and incorporate by reference
the specific allegations set forth in paragraphs 27 through 33 (Plaintiff Gonzalez), paragraphs 37
through 38 (Plaintiff Mauricio), and paragraphs 43 through 46 (Plaintiff Montes), and the general
allegations related to their claims as if fully set forth herein. Plaintiffs Gonzalez and Mauricio
state this claim for relief against Defendant Vides Casanova; Plaintiffs Gonzalez and Montes
state this claim for relief against Defendant Garcia.
93. The crimes against humanity perpetrated against Plaintiffs Gonzalez, Mauricio,
and Montes described herein constituted “tort[s] … committed in violation of the law of nations
or a treaty of the United States” under the Alien Tort Claims Act, 28 U.S.C. §1350, in that they
constituted a violation of customary international law as part of the “the law of nations.” The
customary international law prohibition against crimes against humanity is reflected, expressed,
defined and codified in Article 7 of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, United
Nations, Diplomatic Conference of Plenipotentiaries on the Establishment of an International
Criminal Court, U.N. Doc. A/CONF. 183/9 (1998), reprinted in 37 I.L.M. 999 (1998) (“the ICC
Statute”); the Charter of the International Military Tribunal, Nuremberg, of 8 August 1945 (“IMT
Charter”), confirmed by G.A. Res. 3, U.N. Doc. A/50 (1946) and G.A. Res. 95, U.N. Doc. A/236
(1946); the Special Proclamation by the Supreme Commander for the Allied Powers at Tokyo,
Jan. 19, 1946, T.I.A.S. No. 1589. 4 Bevans 20, 21, as amended Apr. 26, 1946, 4 Bevans 20, 27
(“Tokyo Charter”); the Convention on the Non-Applicability of Statutory Limitations to War
Crimes and Crimes Against Humanity, adopted Nov. 26, 1968, 754 U.N.T.S. 73 (entered into
force Nov. 11, 1970); the Principles of International Co-Operation in the Detection, Arrest,
Extradition and Punishment of Persons Guilty of War Crimes Against Humanity, G.A. Res.
A/9039/Add.I (1973); the Statute of the International Tribunal for the Prosecution of Persons
Responsible for Serious Violations of International Humanitarian Law Committed in the
Territory of the Former Yugoslavia since 1991, Report of the Secretary General pursuant to
Paragraph 2 of Security Council Resolution 808 (1993), U.N. Doc. S/25704 at 36 (1993),
SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR TORTURE; CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY; CRUEL, INHUMAN OR
DEGRADING TREATMENT OR PUNISHMENT; AND ARBITRARY DETENTION
wc-36270
20
adopted by S.C. Res. 827, U.N. Doc. S/Res./827 (1993), reprinted in 32 I.L.M. 1159, 1170
(1993) (“ICTY Statute”); and the Statute for the International Tribunal for Rwanda, U.N. SCOR,
49th Sess., 3453rd mtg. at 1, U.N. Doc. S/Res./955 (1994) (“ICTR Statute”).
94. The acts of torture, arbitrary detention, rape and other inhumane acts alleged
herein constituted crimes against humanity under customary international law. These acts were
committed in the context of a widespread and systematic attack against a civilian population.
These acts were instigated and/or directed by Defendants and their subordinates, agents and/or
co-conspirators in the Salvadoran Military and Security Forces. Defendants and their
subordinates and/or co-conspirators sought to conceal and cover up these acts. Further,
Defendants failed to prevent abuses or punish the perpetrators.
95. The acts described herein placed Plaintiffs Gonzalez, Mauricio, and Montes in
imminent fear for their lives and caused them to suffer severe physical and mental pain and
suffering. As a result of the crimes against humanity described above, Plaintiffs Gonzalez,
Mauricio, and Montes are entitled to compensation in an amount to be determined at trial.
96. Defendants’ acts were deliberate, willful, intentional, wanton, malicious, and
oppressive and should be punished by an award of punitive damages in an amount to be
determined at trial.
SIXTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF
(Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment Under the Alien Tort Claims Act and
the Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or
Punishment)
97. Plaintiffs Gonzalez, Mauricio, and Montes reallege and incorporate by reference
the specific allegations set forth in paragraphs 27 through 33 (Plaintiff Gonzalez), paragraphs 37
through 39 (Plaintiff Mauricio), and paragraphs 43 through 46 (Plaintiff Montes), and the general
allegations related to their claims as if fully set forth herein. Plaintiffs Gonzalez and Mauricio
state this claim for relief against Defendant Vides Casanova; Plaintiffs Gonzalez and Montes
state this claim for relief against Defendant Garcia.
SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR TORTURE; CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY; CRUEL, INHUMAN OR
DEGRADING TREATMENT OR PUNISHMENT; AND ARBITRARY DETENTION
wc-36270
21
98. The cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment committed against
Plaintiffs Gonzalez, Mauricio, and Montes described herein constituted “tort[s] … committed in
violation of the law of nations or a treaty of the United States” under the Alien Tort Claims Act,
28 U.S.C. §1350, in that they violated the prohibition against cruel, inhuman or degrading
treatment or punishment contained in the Torture Convention.
99. The acts of cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment described herein
had the intent and the effect of grossly humiliating and debasing Plaintiffs Gonzalez, Mauricio,
and Montes, forcing them to act against their will and conscience, inciting fear and anguish,
breaking their physical or moral resistance, and/or forcing them to leave their home and country
and flee into exile. As an intended result of these acts, Plaintiffs Gonzalez, Mauricio, and
Montes were placed in great fear of their lives, suffered severe physical and psychological abuse
and agony, and were forced to flee into exile.
100. These acts were instigated and/or directed by Defendants and their subordinates,
agents and/or co-conspirators in the Salvadoran Military and Security Forces. Defendants and
their subordinates and/or co-conspirators sought to conceal and cover up these acts. Further,
Defendants failed to prevent abuses or punish the perpetrators.
101. As a result of the cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment
described above, Plaintiffs Gonzalez, Mauricio, and Montes have been damaged in an amount to
be determined at trial.
102. Defendants’ acts were deliberate, willful, intentional, wanton, malicious, and
oppressive and should be punished by an award of punitive damages in an amount to be
determined at trial.
SEVENTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF
(Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment Under the Alien Tort Claims Act and
the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights)
103. Plaintiffs Gonzalez, Mauricio, and Montes reallege and incorporate by reference
the specific allegations set forth in paragraphs 27 through 33 (Plaintiff Gonzalez), paragraphs 37
through 39 (Plaintiff Mauricio), and paragraphs 43 through 46 (Plaintiff Montes), and the general
SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR TORTURE; CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY; CRUEL, INHUMAN OR
DEGRADING TREATMENT OR PUNISHMENT; AND ARBITRARY DETENTION
wc-36270
22
allegations related to their claims as if fully set forth herein. Plaintiffs Gonzalez and Mauricio
state this claim for relief against Defendant Vides Casanova; Plaintiffs Gonzalez and Montes
state this claim for relief against Defendant Garcia.
104. The acts of cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment inflicted upon
Plaintiffs Gonzalez, Mauricio, and Montes described herein constituted “tort[s] … committed in
violation of the law of nations or a treaty of the United States” under the Alien Tort Claims Act,
28 U.S.C. §1350, in that they violated the prohibition against cruel, inhuman and degrading
treatment in Article 7 of the ICCPR.
105. The acts of cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment described herein
had the intent and the effect of grossly humiliating and debasing Plaintiffs Gonzalez, Mauricio,
and Montes, forcing them to act against their will and conscience, inciting fear and anguish,
breaking their physical or moral resistance, and/or forcing them to leave their home and country
and flee into exile. As an intended result of these acts, Plaintiffs Gonzalez, Mauricio, and
Montes were placed in great fear of their lives, suffered severe physical and psychological abuse
and agony, and were forced to flee into exile.
106. These acts were instigated and/or directed by Defendants and their subordinates,
agents and/or co-conspirators in the Salvadoran Military and Security Forces. Defendants and
their subordinates and/or co-conspirators sought to conceal and cover up these acts. Further,
Defendants failed to prevent abuses or punish the perpetrators.
107. As a result of the cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment
described above, Plaintiffs Gonzalez, Mauricio, and Montes have been damaged in an amount to
be determined at trial.
108. Defendants’ acts were deliberate, willful, intentional, wanton, malicious, and
oppressive and should be punished by an award of punitive damages in an amount to be
determined at trial.
SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR TORTURE; CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY; CRUEL, INHUMAN OR
DEGRADING TREATMENT OR PUNISHMENT; AND ARBITRARY DETENTION
wc-36270
23
EIGHTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF
(Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment Under the
Alien Tort Claims Act and Customary International Law)
109. Plaintiffs Gonzalez, Mauricio, and Montes reallege and incorporate by reference
the specific allegations set forth in paragraphs 27 through 33 (Plaintiff Gonzalez), paragraphs 37
through 39 (Plaintiff Mauricio), and paragraphs 43 through 46 (Plaintiff Montes), and the general
allegations related to their claims as if fully set forth herein. Plaintiffs Gonzalez and Mauricio
state this claim for relief against Defendant Vides Casanova; Plaintiffs Gonzalez and Montes
state this claim for relief against Defendant Garcia.
110. The acts of cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment committed
against Plaintiffs Gonzalez, Mauricio, and Montes described herein constituted “tort[s] …
committed in violation of the law of nations or a treaty of the United States” under the Alien Tort
Claims Act, 28 U.S.C. §1350, in that they constituted a violation of customary international law
as part of the ‘law of nations.” The customary international law prohibition against cruel,
inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment is reflected, expressed, defined and codified in
the Torture Convention; the ICCPR; the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, G.A. Res.
217A(iii), U.N. Doc. A/810 (1948); the Declaration on the Protection of All Persons From Being
Subjected to Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, G.A.
Res. 3452, 30 U.N. Doc., GAOR Supp. (No. 34) at 91, U.N. Doc. A/10034 (1976); the Fourth
Geneva Convention; Protocol II; the American Convention on Human Rights (Pact of San Jose,
Costa Rica), O.A.S.T.S. No. 36 at 1, O.A.S. Off. Rec. OEA/Ser. L/V/II, 23, doc. 21, rev. 2
(English 1978); and the Inter-American Convention to Prevent and Punish Torture, O.A.S.T.S.
No. 67, O.A.S. Doc. OEA/Ser. P, AG/doc. 023/85 rev. 1, at 46-54 (English 1986), reprinted in
25 I.L.M. 519 (1986).
111. The acts of cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment described herein
had the intent and the effect of grossly humiliating and debasing Plaintiffs Gonzalez, Mauricio,
and Montes, forcing them to act against their will and conscience, inciting fear and anguish,
SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR TORTURE; CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY; CRUEL, INHUMAN OR
DEGRADING TREATMENT OR PUNISHMENT; AND ARBITRARY DETENTION
wc-36270
24
breaking their physical or moral resistance, and/or forcing them to leave their home and country
and flee into exile.
112. These acts were instigated and/or directed by Defendants and their subordinates,
agents and/or co-conspirators in the Salvadoran Military and Security Forces. Defendants and
their subordinates and/or co-conspirators sought to conceal and cover up these acts. Further,
Defendants failed to prevent abuses or punish the perpetrators.
113. As an intended result of Defendants’ acts, Plaintiffs Gonzalez, Mauricio, and
Montes were placed in great fear of their lives, suffered severe physical and psychological abuse
and agony, and were forced to leave their homes and country and flee into exile. As a result of
the cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment described above, Plaintiffs Gonzalez,
Mauricio, and Montes have been damaged in an amount to be determined at trial.
114. Defendants’ acts were deliberate, willful, intentional, wanton, malicious, and
oppressive and should be punished by an award of punitive damages in an amount to be
determined at trial.
NINTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF
(Arbitrary Detention Under the Alien Tort Claims Act and Customary International Law)
115. Plaintiffs Gonzalez, Mauricio, and Montes reallege and incorporate by reference
the specific allegations set forth in paragraphs 26 through 33 (Plaintiff Gonzalez), paragraphs 37
through 40 (Plaintiff Mauricio), and paragraphs 43 through 47 (Plaintiff Montes), and the general
allegations related to their claims as if fully set forth herein. Plaintiffs Gonzalez and Mauricio
state this claim for relief against Defendant Vides Casanova; Plaintiffs Gonzalez and Montes
state this claim for relief against Defendant Garcia.
116. The acts of arbitrary detention described herein constituted “tort[s] … committed
in violation of the law of nations or a treaty of the United States” under the Alien Tort Claims
Act, 28 U.S.C. §1350, in that they constituted a violation of customary international law as part
of the “the law of nations.” The customary international law prohibition against arbitrary
detention is reflected, expressed, defined and codified in the ICCPR; the Universal Declaration of
Human Rights, G.A. Res. 217A(iii), U.N. Doc. A/810 (1948); the American Convention on
SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR TORTURE; CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY; CRUEL, INHUMAN OR
DEGRADING TREATMENT OR PUNISHMENT; AND ARBITRARY DETENTION
wc-36270
25
Human Rights (Pact of San Jose, Costa Rica), O.A.S.T.S. No. 36 at 1, O.A.S. Off. Rec.
OEA/Ser. L/V/II, 23, doc. 21, rev. 2 (English 1978); the Fourth Geneva Convention; Protocol II.
117. Defendants’ subordinates, agents and/or co-conspirators arbitrarily detained
Plaintiffs Gonzalez, Mauricio, and Montes without warrant, probable cause, articulable or notice
of charges, and failed to accord them due process. These acts of arbitrary detention were
instigated and/or directed by Defendants and their subordinates, agents and/or co-conspirators in
the Salvadoran Military and Security Forces. Defendants and their subordinates and/or co-
conspirators sought to conceal and cover up these acts. Further, Defendants failed to prevent
abuses or punish the perpetrators.
118. The acts described herein placed Plaintiffs Gonzalez, Mauricio, and Montes in
imminent fear for their lives and caused them to suffer severe physical and mental pain and
suffering. As a result of the acts of arbitrary detention described above, Plaintiff s Gonzalez,
Mauricio, and Montes are entitled to compensation in an amount to be determined at trial.
119. Defendants’ acts were deliberate, willful, intentional, wanton, malicious, and
oppressive and should be punished by an award of punitive damages in an amount to be
determined at trial.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs pray for judgment against each Defendant as follows:
1. For compensatory damages according to proof;
2. For punitive and exemplary damages, according to proof;
3. For prejudgment interest as allowed by law;
SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR TORTURE; CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY; CRUEL, INHUMAN OR
DEGRADING TREATMENT OR PUNISHMENT; AND ARBITRARY DETENTION
wc-36270
26
4. For attorneys’ fees and costs of suit, according to proof;
5. For any such other and further relief as the Court deems just and proper.
Dated: February 17, 2000.
Respectfully submitted, By Attorneys for Plaintiffs JAMES J. GARRETT JAMES M. SCHURZ PETER J. STERN BETH VAN SCHAACK MORRISON & FOERSTER LLP 101 Ygnacio Valley Road, Suite 450 Walnut Creek, CA 94596 Tel: (925) 295-3300 Fax: (925) 946-9912 JAMES K. GREEN (Florida Bar No. 0229466) 250 Australia Ave., Suite 1602 West Palm Beach, Florida 33401 Tel. (561) 695-2029 Fax (561) 655-1357 SUSAN SHAWN ROBERTS JILL ANNE PEASLEY BETH STEPHENS The Center for Justice and Accountability 588 Sutter St., No. 433 San Francisco, CA 94102 (415) 544-0444 CAROLYN PATTY BLUM Boalt Hall School of Law 685 Simon Hall University of California Berkeley, CA 94720-7200 (510) 642-5980 PAUL HOFFMAN Schonbrun DeSimone Seplow Harris & Hoffman, L.L.P. 723 Ocean Front Walk Venice, CA 90291 (301) 396 0731